The only appreciable difference he could offer (which he did not, but could) is binary packages instead of having to compile everything from source.
Of course, part of the reason Gentoo is from source, and why less modular distributions are so monolithic, is that many UNIX programs require specific options at compile time to modify their behavior to fit just right on your system.
Apart from having a huge compile farm which you'd hand the equivalent of your USE flags in Gentoo, and get back a binary built just right for your system, I don't see any particularly clever way to do this.
Which version? I run 3.0M5-6, I usually abhor code completion since I find more often than not it gets in the way of me typing what I wanted anyways but Eclipse's has remaing pleasantly unobtrusive for all the time that I've been using it.
As usual I'll come out with my Gentoo Zealotry but I'd like to deflect some of the problems I'm seeing mentioned here.
Gentoo is a Linux distribution largely centric to the Portage package manager (there are other features of Gentoo, but Portage is by far the most conspicuous)
Portage is a package manager loosely inspired by FreeBSD's ports system. Portage maintains a global software configuration file called make.conf. Make.conf holds meta-configuration settings about your system. As Portage builds all programs from source for your machine, make.conf is the place where you describe your machine to Portage. make.conf also holds a collection of use flags. Use flags are global binary switches. They have a default value if they are unspecified, and if you include a Use flag (ie USE="java") then it turns that flag on, and if you include -flag, (ie USE="-java") then it explicitly will not use that feature which is globally recognized by Gentoo.
I see complaints that emerge VI tried to build X and thus portage is "smarter" than you as a sysadmin. This is patently false and ignorant. Portage lets you do your job as a sysadmin once and then never have to worry about doing it again. If you do not want X on a machine then you need merely put "-X" in your use flags.
It puts control in your hands. If you want an application built to support certain things you can have it. If you do not want to support other things explicitly it will do that. It defaults tod doing what's sensible for most people who use Linux casually. If you aren't a casual user, spend a week or so getting familiar with portage and it's configuration. emerge is an incredibly potent tool. All of my systems are patched automatically every day, from source, with the configuration I have specified for that system. My binaries are all built with -march for the CPU, and -Os. And I've never once had any of my systems have a failure caused by misconfigured dependencies. They stay up to date and I don't have to worry about it.
If you want to do all your dependency checking yourself, you're welcome to. However there's a good solution that takes care of all of the issues revolving around this available, freely, to the world. Click here to find out more about it.
The GPL allows people to do absolutely whatever they want with software obtained under it, including using it to run their business in a commercial environment. The GPL does not allow one to distribute the product which was obtained through the GPL in a non-GPLed product, or to distribute products which contain GPLed products under a non-GPL license.
MySQL AB and Hans Reiser make their money by offering alternative commercial licenses which will allow you to distribute the work you derive from their work under a non-GPL license. This only means you have to pay them if you want to release software which links to the code they wrote
Re:let's see sun invents java, ibm, makes a tool .
on
Sun and Eclipse Squabble
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Speaking from professional experience, one needs only include an swt.jar and set of binary libraries in your distribution for the platforms which you are targeting. You can explicitly specify the swt library to be part of your libraries when you start up the VM for your java application, and then you're done.
The pain attached to using SWT is all but irrelevant considering the advantages of having the platform native widget set at your disposal through a homogenous API. If you love MDI then you won't enjoy working with SWT, otherwise there's really no reason not to develop with it. It looks alot better than Swing or AWT.
IETF is the International Engineering Task Force. They are responsible for keeping the RFCs which have made the internet what it is today. They are responsible for creating standardizations for protocols which have enabled all of the major operating systems today to interoperate (on a crude level) on a huge public network.
If it comes back and bites you in the ass, start looking for a new job. Don't quit. When you find the new job, resign with a notice, and explain the necessity of this delay to your potential employers.
Your company would likely drop you like a bad habit if they felt that you were more problem than you were worth. ESPECIALLY if you're nervous about bringing up issues in the company. Feeling loyalty toward them is ludicrous. Do what you know is right, if you cannot there, then go elsewhere where you can.
These fish are created by inducing mass genetic mutation with a specially bred virus which alters the DNA of the cells which it infects. The virus itself is benign enough to initial observation. The concern is that these fish, by definition, have been affected by the virus.
If one of these fish was released into the wild, there is potential that the virus would also be released into the wild. When that occurs, the aftermath could be catastrophic. Or it could also be completely benign. The suit is demanding that this question be determined before the fish are released to people in general.
Microsoft is being forced to eat their dogfood...
on
New IE Holes Discovered
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Microsoft has claimed time and again that their response times to security alerts are sterling, as opposed to the "slow" response times for OSS. They make these claims without telling consumers that they have known about the exploit for months and are publicly releasing knowledge right before they release the fix.
This is a case of people letting Microsoft's boastful ways catch up to it. If they are as fast as they have claimed, time and again, there won't be a problem for those people who are diligent in patching.
Additionally with the advent of companies using the DMCA to try and stifle this behavior, it is more important than ever to engage in it and further show the flaws with this absolutely off the wall piece of legislation. See this article.
The gapin flaw with this article is that it take the typical suit view of Google. Google's founders have one overriding principal that guides everything, "Don't be evil," which has lead to it's continued success. Things like "locking in" customers would be the death knell of Google, as it's simplistic and quick search are what attracted it's user base to begin with.
Their successful advertising initiative likewise mirrored the message. People don't like being treated like a commodity to be "locked in", especially not the droves of nerds on the internet. I'd be highly suspect that ANY of the "competing" search companies would steal away any of google's userbase, as they will all try and do things for their own benefit that will ultimately make them seem worse in a head to head comparison against google.
The problem with this plot is that it is fundamentally incompatible with copyrights: you cannot release work as both copyrighted AND under the AFV. Artists must choose to work under either one or the other but not both, and copyrights are profitable right now.
I think the interesting nuggest which people have often overlooked is that online distribution has already surpassed CDs. Apple has 80% of that market. If Apple started signing new artists directly instead of doing everything through the RIAA, both the Artists and apple could benefit greatly, leaving the evil megacorporation out in the cold.
I wouldn't worry about flooding filters hampering their accuracy. As long as people keep more or less true to the model which Paul Graham prescribed (training the bayesian filter only when it makes a mistake), then these spams have absolutely no bearing on the server's records; during the classification operation the filter's word database is "read-only".
What the spammers may have latched onto is the concept of overfitting. However due to implementation details, this shouldn't be a problem unless those operating the filters are grossly incompetant (you'd have to mark all of the things it catches as spam as not being spam, then mark it as being spam once again in order to do try and do this).
However one of the previous articles regarding the Joe-Jobs incited by the mocking of Dimensional Warp Generators does give one cause to pause before implementing one of Mr. Graham's retaliatory filters.
SCOX after everyone gets wind of this nonsense tomorrow.
They quite knowingly accepted the terms and conditions of the GPL, long before they ever acquired the rights to UNIX or worked on Project Monterey. Even if by some crazy ludicrous miracle of stupidity they actually managed to get anywhere with their lawsuit regarding Unix rights, I'd be incredulous to see them get anywhere with attempts to prosecute users of Linux, commercial or otherwise.
He doesn't have much choice, Star Wars was always supposed to be the story of Anakin Skywalker. If he focused on the Clone Wars instead of Anakin's fall from grace, that would be contradictory to the intent.
Which is not to say that I think this will be good, or will do the Clone Wars justice, or will in any way shape or form be fitting. But try to see things from George's point of view.
Would have managed a more potent marketing ploy considering that they really don't have any product to be selling. They needed to be able to field technical questions, in detail, and were unable to. This hurts their credibility with those who oppose them.
They needed to secure the support of their resellers, without whom they have no income, however basically it sounds like they snubbed them to their faces.
And as a final pedantic note, we all know UNIX is in Linux. In case they forgot, they released System III under a BSD-like license, and Linux subscribes to many of the UNIX philosophies. (Do one thing and do it well). This isn't even an interesting point.
It's entirely possible that HP is making a calculated gamble that they can steal IBM's potential Linux customers out from under them by offering indemnification, even if they aren't 100% sure they have a defensible position.
Of course this brings up the point I was discussing with a friend of mine the other day: SCO's entire case for licensing binary versions of portions of the Linux kernel relies on forgiving them for ignorantly distributing these portions under the GPL. If such a courtesy is extended to SCO due to their ignorance, I doubt it would be denied to customers who were ignorantly violating SCO Group's so called intellectual property.
Slashdot Mirror
The only appreciable difference he could offer (which he did not, but could) is binary packages instead of having to compile everything from source.
Of course, part of the reason Gentoo is from source, and why less modular distributions are so monolithic, is that many UNIX programs require specific options at compile time to modify their behavior to fit just right on your system.
Apart from having a huge compile farm which you'd hand the equivalent of your USE flags in Gentoo, and get back a binary built just right for your system, I don't see any particularly clever way to do this.
Because he hates BillG and supports Linux, of course.
According to the references you provide, both nations are Federal Republics.
How could anyone buy this rubbish, it's simply beyond my comprehension!
Which version? I run 3.0M5-6, I usually abhor code completion since I find more often than not it gets in the way of me typing what I wanted anyways but Eclipse's has remaing pleasantly unobtrusive for all the time that I've been using it.
Eclipse
As usual I'll come out with my Gentoo Zealotry but I'd like to deflect some of the problems I'm seeing mentioned here.
Gentoo is a Linux distribution largely centric to the Portage package manager (there are other features of Gentoo, but Portage is by far the most conspicuous)
Portage is a package manager loosely inspired by FreeBSD's ports system. Portage maintains a global software configuration file called make.conf. Make.conf holds meta-configuration settings about your system. As Portage builds all programs from source for your machine, make.conf is the place where you describe your machine to Portage. make.conf also holds a collection of use flags. Use flags are global binary switches. They have a default value if they are unspecified, and if you include a Use flag (ie USE="java") then it turns that flag on, and if you include -flag, (ie USE="-java") then it explicitly will not use that feature which is globally recognized by Gentoo.
I see complaints that emerge VI tried to build X and thus portage is "smarter" than you as a sysadmin. This is patently false and ignorant. Portage lets you do your job as a sysadmin once and then never have to worry about doing it again. If you do not want X on a machine then you need merely put "-X" in your use flags.
It puts control in your hands. If you want an application built to support certain things you can have it. If you do not want to support other things explicitly it will do that. It defaults tod doing what's sensible for most people who use Linux casually. If you aren't a casual user, spend a week or so getting familiar with portage and it's configuration. emerge is an incredibly potent tool. All of my systems are patched automatically every day, from source, with the configuration I have specified for that system. My binaries are all built with -march for the CPU, and -Os. And I've never once had any of my systems have a failure caused by misconfigured dependencies. They stay up to date and I don't have to worry about it.
If you want to do all your dependency checking yourself, you're welcome to. However there's a good solution that takes care of all of the issues revolving around this available, freely, to the world. Click here to find out more about it.
If your file system supported true symbolic links, your problem could be largely mitigated by using them.
Your opinion comes from a demonstrably spurious source.
MySQL and ReiserFS are both made available under the terms of the GNU General Public License.
The GPL allows people to do absolutely whatever they want with software obtained under it, including using it to run their business in a commercial environment. The GPL does not allow one to distribute the product which was obtained through the GPL in a non-GPLed product, or to distribute products which contain GPLed products under a non-GPL license.
MySQL AB and Hans Reiser make their money by offering alternative commercial licenses which will allow you to distribute the work you derive from their work under a non-GPL license. This only means you have to pay them if you want to release software which links to the code they wrote
Speaking from professional experience, one needs only include an swt.jar and set of binary libraries in your distribution for the platforms which you are targeting. You can explicitly specify the swt library to be part of your libraries when you start up the VM for your java application, and then you're done.
The pain attached to using SWT is all but irrelevant considering the advantages of having the platform native widget set at your disposal through a homogenous API. If you love MDI then you won't enjoy working with SWT, otherwise there's really no reason not to develop with it. It looks alot better than Swing or AWT.
IETF is the International Engineering Task Force. They are responsible for keeping the RFCs which have made the internet what it is today. They are responsible for creating standardizations for protocols which have enabled all of the major operating systems today to interoperate (on a crude level) on a huge public network.
Be thankful for their hard work.
He said 'about'. MS signed one and Sun signed another. Apparently, 2/15ths is about 20%.
Seems like par for the course for Darl.
...just got a whole lot less useful. ;)
If it comes back and bites you in the ass, start looking for a new job. Don't quit. When you find the new job, resign with a notice, and explain the necessity of this delay to your potential employers.
Your company would likely drop you like a bad habit if they felt that you were more problem than you were worth. ESPECIALLY if you're nervous about bringing up issues in the company. Feeling loyalty toward them is ludicrous. Do what you know is right, if you cannot there, then go elsewhere where you can.
These fish are created by inducing mass genetic mutation with a specially bred virus which alters the DNA of the cells which it infects. The virus itself is benign enough to initial observation. The concern is that these fish, by definition, have been affected by the virus.
If one of these fish was released into the wild, there is potential that the virus would also be released into the wild. When that occurs, the aftermath could be catastrophic. Or it could also be completely benign. The suit is demanding that this question be determined before the fish are released to people in general.
The apple doesn't fall far from the tree.
Microsoft has claimed time and again that their response times to security alerts are sterling, as opposed to the "slow" response times for OSS. They make these claims without telling consumers that they have known about the exploit for months and are publicly releasing knowledge right before they release the fix.
This is a case of people letting Microsoft's boastful ways catch up to it. If they are as fast as they have claimed, time and again, there won't be a problem for those people who are diligent in patching.
Additionally with the advent of companies using the DMCA to try and stifle this behavior, it is more important than ever to engage in it and further show the flaws with this absolutely off the wall piece of legislation. See this article.
The gapin flaw with this article is that it take the typical suit view of Google. Google's founders have one overriding principal that guides everything, "Don't be evil," which has lead to it's continued success. Things like "locking in" customers would be the death knell of Google, as it's simplistic and quick search are what attracted it's user base to begin with.
Their successful advertising initiative likewise mirrored the message. People don't like being treated like a commodity to be "locked in", especially not the droves of nerds on the internet. I'd be highly suspect that ANY of the "competing" search companies would steal away any of google's userbase, as they will all try and do things for their own benefit that will ultimately make them seem worse in a head to head comparison against google.
I think the interesting nuggest which people have often overlooked is that online distribution has already surpassed CDs. Apple has 80% of that market. If Apple started signing new artists directly instead of doing everything through the RIAA, both the Artists and apple could benefit greatly, leaving the evil megacorporation out in the cold.
I wouldn't worry about flooding filters hampering their accuracy. As long as people keep more or less true to the model which Paul Graham prescribed (training the bayesian filter only when it makes a mistake), then these spams have absolutely no bearing on the server's records; during the classification operation the filter's word database is "read-only".
What the spammers may have latched onto is the concept of overfitting. However due to implementation details, this shouldn't be a problem unless those operating the filters are grossly incompetant (you'd have to mark all of the things it catches as spam as not being spam, then mark it as being spam once again in order to do try and do this).
However one of the previous articles regarding the Joe-Jobs incited by the mocking of Dimensional Warp Generators does give one cause to pause before implementing one of Mr. Graham's retaliatory filters.
They quite knowingly accepted the terms and conditions of the GPL, long before they ever acquired the rights to UNIX or worked on Project Monterey. Even if by some crazy ludicrous miracle of stupidity they actually managed to get anywhere with their lawsuit regarding Unix rights, I'd be incredulous to see them get anywhere with attempts to prosecute users of Linux, commercial or otherwise.
Despite verbosity, IANAL
He doesn't have much choice, Star Wars was always supposed to be the story of Anakin Skywalker. If he focused on the Clone Wars instead of Anakin's fall from grace, that would be contradictory to the intent.
Which is not to say that I think this will be good, or will do the Clone Wars justice, or will in any way shape or form be fitting. But try to see things from George's point of view.
Would have managed a more potent marketing ploy considering that they really don't have any product to be selling. They needed to be able to field technical questions, in detail, and were unable to. This hurts their credibility with those who oppose them.
They needed to secure the support of their resellers, without whom they have no income, however basically it sounds like they snubbed them to their faces.
And as a final pedantic note, we all know UNIX is in Linux. In case they forgot, they released System III under a BSD-like license, and Linux subscribes to many of the UNIX philosophies. (Do one thing and do it well). This isn't even an interesting point.
I still remain unimpressed by SCO.
They're in cohoots! In exchange for providing a backdoor for the RIAA to delete illegal MP3s off your computer, they each got a new copy of 's CD!
It's entirely possible that HP is making a calculated gamble that they can steal IBM's potential Linux customers out from under them by offering indemnification, even if they aren't 100% sure they have a defensible position.
Of course this brings up the point I was discussing with a friend of mine the other day: SCO's entire case for licensing binary versions of portions of the Linux kernel relies on forgiving them for ignorantly distributing these portions under the GPL. If such a courtesy is extended to SCO due to their ignorance, I doubt it would be denied to customers who were ignorantly violating SCO Group's so called intellectual property.